If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

The rest have already switched.. and you cannot deny gnome has hemorrhaged users since the release of gnome3.

Which users?

I dont think im the only one hahaha!
GS supporters all seem act as if each person who complains individually is the only person complaining. You also have the sheer arrogance to assume that we haven't given it a chance. Why do you think this whole issue has created such a stink? It's not just me.

You made the mistake to think about arrogance when pointed out about your own bad habit. For you, it is much easier to complain rather than researching or asking for help. When you loudly complain, prepare for the reaction.

I used it for about 3 months. If it was any better than gnome 2 surely I would still be using it. I wouldn't be using MATE or cinnamon or some other environment.
But yea, the operative word in your post was some. Not majority, not all..

If you really use for three months, you would come with detailed results of shortfall and points to improve which you failed to do. You just highlighted your own preferences which is MATE or Cinnamon (one is based on dead technologies and the other is just an extended tweaked Gnome Shell).

Your combatant responses show a sheer arrogance and disregard for the preferences of anyone who doesn't like gnome 3. I suggested a reasonable compromise, you dismissed it out of hand and with no reasoning.

Funny that Cinnamon is a variation of Gnome 3 which can be easily reproduced by Gnome Classic (excluding the forks like Nemo which is easily reproducible with the extensibility of Nautilus file manager ). What do you expect when you start a combative post?

If your criticisms of me are valid, then you have also stooped to the same level.

What you call criticisms of you is only highlighted by your own reactionary post. The message is to think twice before sending a post with a better manner.

If your links to polls made a point, then to make KDE’s Plasma Desktop default and drop Cinnamon because no one except the Mint crowd seems to actually care and Xfce established itself as alternative for followers of Gnome's traditional UI. The polls also are evidence that Gnome 3 is actually well received, ranking among the top spots.

If your links to polls made a point, then to make KDE’s Plasma Desktop default and drop Cinnamon because no one except the Mint crowd seems to actually care and Xfce established itself as alternative for followers of Gnome's traditional UI. The polls also are evidence that Gnome 3 is actually well received, ranking among the top spots.

Wow thanks, I hadn't quite realised it was THAT bad for gnome 3.
For a DE that used to be #1 with over 40% that IS terrible. Its user base has more than halved

Also regards to fedoraforum what do you expect, its a distro that still uses gnome3 as default. With that taken into consideration, you might expect it to have more than just a VERY slim lead.

I dont think you noticed the figures on the arch linux page for GNOME SHELL vs Compiz either.

Oh and..

Originally Posted by finalzone

Which users?

About 50 percent of the people who were using gnome 2.
If you could find and evidence to dispute the fact that gnome usage has halved since gnome 3 it would be in stark contrast to anything I could find.
Remember the question is not that of a comparison of gnome usage to all the other DE's (MATE and Cinnamon having had far less time to acrue users than gnome did) but rather how many people used gnome before gnome3 in comparison how many use it now.

1) The Gnome Shell fanbois don't seem to grasp the simple fact that their Workflow is not the only one out there

2) Some Gnome Shell "haters" don't seem to understand that for most desktop people Shell is actually an improvement over the traditional desktop because it provides more usable space, plus it looks cooler.

I have said it many times and i will repeat it: Gnome Shell is not well suited for heavy duty multitasking. This does NOT mean that it is not possible to be used in such a way. Hell, even a pure Console could be used for this if someone really wanted. This simply means that it is not the ideal solution. Gnome Shell is mainly targeted at consumers, not producers.

The reason there has been such a backslash for Shell, is because Gnome used to be the DE of choice for the producer, and now it is not. It is not "fear for the new stuff" or "trolling" or anything like it. Gnome used to provide us with a solution and now they removed it with no good reason. At least they should have provided a classic desktop environment for those of us who need it. They are planning to provide it with 3.8. They should have done it earlier.

For those who really like Shell, well, good for you. Trust me, i like it too. It is really good for casual use, and many times when i do not work i switch to it. Fedora is an advanced distro targeted at professionals more than regular users(for this there is Ubuntu). So the proposal to use Cinnamon by default makes sense. What makes no sense, is to use Shell by default in a distro targeted at productivity... It is YOU Gnome Shell LOVERS that are in the wrong here...

1) The Gnome Shell fanbois don't seem to grasp the simple fact that their Workflow is not the only one out there

Not sure we are reading the same thread. But if that has actually been the case, then those people are assholes. Workflow is a personal matter.

I have said it many times and i will repeat it: Gnome Shell is not well suited for heavy duty multitasking. This does NOT mean that it is not possible to be used in such a way. Hell, even a pure Console could be used for this if someone really wanted. This simply means that it is not the ideal solution. Gnome Shell is mainly targeted at consumers, not producers.

And I disagree. I think it works equally or better than GNOME2 in this regard. This is a matter of opinion and not fact. As far as I know no real study on productivity has been done.

For those who really like Shell, well, good for you. Trust me, i like it too. It is really good for casual use, and many times when i do not work i switch to it. Fedora is an advanced distro targeted at professionals more than regular users(for this there is Ubuntu). So the proposal to use Cinnamon by default makes sense. What makes no sense, is to use Shell by default in a distro targeted at productivity... It is YOU Gnome Shell LOVERS that are in the wrong here...

And as I repeatedly has said. Claiming that Gnome-Shell is not good for productivity is actually quite offensive considering that I and a lot of other people doing work that are far from "casual" are using it daily without any problems.

I think the number one reason why these "discussions" don't work is that personal opinions are mistaken for hard truths.

I have said it many times and i will repeat it: Gnome Shell is not well suited for heavy duty multitasking. This does NOT mean that it is not possible to be used in such a way. Hell, even a pure Console could be used for this if someone really wanted. This simply means that it is not the ideal solution. Gnome Shell is mainly targeted at consumers, not producers.

Stating something many times doesn't make it a fact. And the counterpoint is that some of us *do* find it well suited to doing real work - not just adequate, but optimal.

And I really don't know where this consumers vs producers nonsense comes from - it runs the same content-creation apps as any other Linux desktop...

GS supporters all seem act as if each person who complains individually is the only person complaining. You also have the sheer arrogance to assume that we haven't given it a chance. Why do you think this whole issue has created such a stink? It's not just me.

Possibly you're confusing me with one of the other posters, since nowhere in this thread (or any other) have I suggested that opposition to Shell comes from a handful of individuals, nor that those opponents haven't used it.

But yea, the operative word in your post was some. Not majority, not all..

I realise that - that's why I used the word I did. I *know* a lot of people don't like it - but what frustrates me is how many of the antis seem reluctant to accept that they don't represent a totality either. Many statements of "this is unusable" from people who actually mean "...for me".

Your combatant responses show a sheer arrogance and disregard for the preferences of anyone who doesn't like gnome 3. I suggested a reasonable compromise, you dismissed it out of hand and with no reasoning.

Which compromise was that? That's a genuine question - I can't see which post you're referring to. Nor am I disregarding the preferences of those who don't like Shell - I'm objecting to those who seem to have trouble with the idea that I (as a happy Shell user) actually exist.

Ok, I get it, interfacing with your keyboard is one way to avoid interacting with GS. Though, if you are using your keyboard for everything then all desktop environments are equal as long as they have key bindings. . Surprisingly, many people only use the keyboard for typing. Try using a mouse for everything (or touch) and you will see it's exactly like Android with some multi-window support bolted on.

It's not that all environments are *equal* if they have decent keybindings - it's more that a desktop that lacks them will immediately be discounted as not fitting my needs. All the other stuff can be important too, but the ability to do almost everything without taking my hands off they keyboard is a real plus. And it's more than just "bindings" - it's that being able to drive the entire Shell with the keyboard means that nothing is more than a few keystrokes away. I do use a mouse where appropriate - web browsing, or apps with drag-drop interfaces - but not much for desktop stuff. It feels clumsy on any desktop, be it navigating Shell, the Windows start menu, or other equivalents.

And I still don't get why you say multi-window support is bolted on. It's not - it's as integral as it is in every other common desktop. The program launcher is a bit different, sure, but when I'm actually using programs rather than starting them, there's very little difference between Shell and it's rivals.

Since you were replying to me earlier, I explicitly welcome choice -- as long as the big players cooperate on common desktop infrastructure so things interoperate. However, when people actually argue that there is only one way to use a computer and running anything else is wrong (like the guy I was replying to earlier), then these people have lost all sense of reality.

Once a desktop stops doing what people need it to do, people will not spend years changing their habits, people will flock to software which lets them do what they want. KDE learned and has listened to people's complaints after early KDE 4 versions removed functionality, and it changed for the better as a result. Now it seems like GNOME will have to learn the same lesson.

That IS what Gnome 3 haters are doing actually.

In my opinion, haters have already lost the ability to learn new things, and got used to shortcomings of old things.
If Gnome 3 is bad, I felt Gnome 2 is worse. I can't see any reason to stick with Gnome 2.

In my opinion, haters have already lost the ability to learn new things, and got used to shortcomings of old things.

And there it is again. I tried Gnome Shell, just to see what all the fuss is about. And I don't like it. Full stop.
And that now indicates that I have lost the ability to learn something new? Where did you get from? In the last three years I learned many DEs and WMs until I came to the point where I have found the one that fits my needs best. It is i3, not Gnome Shell. Because I can make it behave exactly like I want without any restrictions or the need for externally developed extensions. Because it supports my workflow instead of forcing me to a different one.

Now, please tell me: How is that even possible, how have I learned to configure and use i3 most efficiently when I have lost the ability to learn new things because I don't like Gnome Shell? How got I used to the shortcomings of old things when I have searched a long time to find something that has no shortcomings for me?

Clearly, I don't like GS, I must be dumb and unable to learn, not able to use the new shiny thing that has exactly zero advantages for me.